1. Field of the Invention
Embodiments of the present invention relate to scoring systems and methods, more specifically, to a tennis scoring and display systems and methods.
2. Discussion of Related Art
Tennis courts used for play commonly have individual scoring devices attached to the net support posts. These devices display and record tennis match progress in sets and games for the competitors and surrounding viewers. Historically, these net mounted devices have all been manually operated by flipping printed cards to the desired numbers or placing tennis balls as markers for a respective score on a printed number pole.
Such flip card devices use a T-bar mounted by its vertical member on one of the net posts and two sets of numbered flip cards supported from the top cross members of the T-bar. Each flip card has a pair of small through-holes defined there through adjacent to the top edge of the card. Metal rings are extended through these holes and disposed over the top cross members so as to support the sets of flip cards below the respective cross members of the T-bar. The numbers are printed in sequence on both front and backsides of the flip cards. The cards must be flipped over until the correct numbers are exposed to post the score.
These flip card devices have several disadvantages. First, the flip cards are tedious to use. The user has to lift each card to see if the number being sought is displayed on the opposite side of the current number being displayed. This creates considerable fumbling around to find and post the correct score. Second, the printed numbers must be large enough to be viewed from a distance increasing the overall size of the device. Third, a high number of exposed moving parts. These parts are affected by weather, constant use, wear and tear as well as theft or vandalism. Fourth, the requirement of the whole unit to rotate as players change sides is subject to wear and tear and unwanted movement by wind. Fifth, the device must use four sets of cards to display the overall match score in sets and the current set score in games. Sixth, the projecting cross bars are hazardous to the players.
Other common devices for individual court scoring include U.S. Pat. No. 5,385,113 to Hierath (1995) and U.S. Pat. No. 6,578,513 B1 to Niksich (2003). These devices are comprised of elongated vertically disposed displays that rely on frictionally secured tennis balls corresponding to a score number.
These devices also have several disadvantages. First, The printed numbers must be large enough to be viewed from a distance and individually stacked upon each other increasing the overall size of the device. Second, the units cannot be rotated as players change sides so different colored numbers must be used to differentiate an individual's score confusing spectators without that knowledge. Third, the tennis balls used for marking require additional cost and effort to acquire and are subject to theft and deterioration from weather making the device aesthetically unpleasing. Fourth, to display an overall match score in sets requires additional markers and space on the display.
Scoring displays for individual courts such as those described above have all employed similar outdated characteristics to operate and perform. The progress of recent technology in the components that make up this display have led to a solution that reduces and eliminates many of the shortcomings of these net mounted devices.
Two electronic scoring devices which are not net mounted include U.S. Pat. No. 0,067,280 to Carrillo and Weiss (2002) and U.S. Pat. No. 4,237,372 to Zevgolis and Kitchen (1980).
The device by Carrillo and Weiss (2002) has several disadvantages. First, remote control units to input scores into the display operate the device. Requiring the competitors to hold remote control units as well as tennis balls can become problematic. The units are also subject to loss, theft, and breakage as well as requiring a power source.
Second, the device has a current game score display. This requires an input action via remote control by each competitor for every point played. Holding the remote control unit and making constant inputs is burdensome, tedious and disrupts the flow of play. The benefit of displaying the current game score is outweighed by the inherit problems of operation.
Third, the overall score of the match in completed sets is not represented on the display. The device only displays the amount of games won by a competitor in the current set. Displaying sets that have been completed is vital for the players and possible spectators.
Fourth, the display is mounted on the wall or placed on the ground. An individual court display cannot always be mounted on a wall at a club with multiple courts. A display placed on the ground reduces the viewing angle, is subject to theft and vandalism, and because the unit does not have identically opposed sides, viewers cannot view the score from the other direction.
Fifth, the device includes a match time indicator adding to the complexity and size of the device for information that is not vital for competitors and spectators. Sixth, as competitors change sides, all information has to be switched and reset in multiple steps.
The device by Zevgolis and Kitchen (1980) is an electronic display and the circuitry involved in recording scores for tennis. The device has a display for the current game score which has the identical disadvantages described above for Carillo and Weiss's (2002) patent. The device also does not display the completed set score. The device is meant to be worn on the wrist or belt which eliminates spectators form obtaining score information.